Chris Judd - The Crime and the Punishment - 4 Weeks

[Waynesworld]

You can't be serious?

He was reported on the day by the boundary umpire. Nothing underhanded about it at all from the AFL. Like all match day reports it was referred to the MRP for follow-up.

It was sent directly to the tribunal because their isn't a specific category for Misconduct (Manipulating a Limb) or something similar. I thought it could have been covered by Rough Conduct. If it was considered as Rough Conduct (intentional, high impact, body contact) with his prior bad record he would have got 7 weeks.

Rather than complain about a plot against Carlton, I think you should consider Judd got off a little bit lightly.

I honestly think that all of the Carlton posts in these threads since Friday night must be taking the piss aren't they? Surely their supporters couldn't all be that stupid could they?

 

[Spitta09]

The guy who made this thread is more of an embarassment than the MRP and Tribunal combined

 

[Noidenous]

He answered you in his first line..

Carlton + Chelsea supporter.

Both have bought premierships in the not-too-distant past.

Enough said.

 

[torontoeaglesafc]

Thought the punishment was well-deserved. Every since he left West Coast he's been getting worse.

 

[Noidenous]

lol. calling me a twat is only proving my point that as a carlton supporter, i'm not going to be able to discuss anything with you. agreeing with the suspension is not good enough for you. if i don't call judd a dirty dog, i'm filth.

There's twats at every club. He simply stated that you are a twat, regardless of what club you support. Capiche?

 

[Noidenous]

It was about 50-60 degrees of movement actually and it's what lead to the shoulder being twisted around. Watch the footage. It's all pretty obvious.

Should have spent more time in Geometry and Physics, bub.

 

[Ron The Bear]

So not really an allegation. Nevertheless, a line you wouldn't want to be treading with this administration. It's not like it shouldn't have gone to the tribunal anyways - it would be under-estimated with the MRP categories.

Definitely an allegation. He claimed Anderson influenced the MRP to not assess the case, and instead escalate it to the tribunal. He is alleging corruption.

 

[robstewart23]

Paul Connors apologises to AA for his comments this morning. That was quick. Wonder what AA threatened to do?

 

[Noidenous]

This is where most of you blokes fail tbh. Just too happy to make up shit when it sounds good for your cause.

The reality - I feel we're comfortable with the process, except for two things - one, that the (MRP) boss is making comments about the case before it's heard ... and the head of football (Anderson) forever interfering in things. Let's get it straight, Chris knows he's stuffed up and he's apologised. But it's a bit like people want to stone him.

I must have missed the part where it's against the rules for Fraser to state why the matter was sent to the tribunal.

Fraser starts his sentences with we felt, not it was.

Now tell me, what's this about making shit up to suit your own cause?

 

[Ron The Bear]

Paul Connors apologises to AA for his comments this morning. That was quick. Wonder what AA threatened to do?

Personally I'd like to have seen the claims tested in court, with witnesses giving evidence against the AFL.

 

[PenAndPaper]

Here is an article i wrote on why the AFL seems to want to punish him harder than what is necessary

http://www.penandpapersports.com/document.php?docID=1012

 

[Noidenous]

Paul Connors apologises to AA for his comments this morning. That was quick. Wonder what AA threatened to do?

Anderson made it very clear that without proof of corruption, Connors' comments fall under the category of defamation.

Evidently, Connors didn't have any proof and, through making the apology, admitted he was muck-raking.

 

[Pedro59]

The guy who made this thread is more of an embarassment than the MRP and Tribunal combined

Why exactly?
care to state your reasons for this statement?

Or just another sniper who wont stay on topic ( go to the bay mate)

Come on state your reasons why "the guy is an embarrassment ?"

Now that you'r playing the man rather than the topic, and don't even know me, please enlighten me Spitta

And the MRP and tribunal ? the same one that let Barry Hall off because of all the (media ) pressure?

Good well thought out and researched post indicative of advanced maturity

 

[Max zero]

That's definitely true - there is a certain level of novelty to this type of act. Very few acts like these happen. Hunt's stomp is in a similar category for mine though.

Wellingham's, as far as intent and severity go was worse, it certainly was no better - Intent was clear cut. In fact it was conceded. Severity was enough to cause a broken jaw, and one of the more sickening concussions you'll see. It had all the ingredients of the Lloyd incident a few years back, alas received far less outrage than what Wellingham's hit did. Another of those love-to-hate players.

A bit of both - I think that's mentioned in the post quoted.
This is probably a contributing factor. The incident was unsightly, very difficult to defend, and something that shouldn't be seen on the football field. But still, if any other player on our list did it, even Waite, it wouldn't have received a 150 page MB thread. I'd be thinking 20 at tops.

I think it's a pretty shit reflection on the state of (BF) football supporter culture, if nothing else.

Carlton fans should be more inwardly disappointed in their captain who gave North extra impetus to win a crucial match.

To be honest Carlton fans bring it on themselves. They seem to reveal in the hatred (and encourage it) except when it has an actual effect then it's too harsh.

Carlton have always had a 'born to rule mentality' and the transition to a national league has probably hurt them more then any other club.

It's not 1980 any more Carlton aren't this special snowflake who can just buy or bluster their way out of trouble.

The club has still not learnt humility.

 

[Max zero]

Why exactly?
care to state your reasons for this statement?

Or just another sniper who wont stay on topic ( go to the bay mate)

Come on state your reasons why "the guy is an embarrassment ?"

Now that you'r playing the man rather than the topic, and don't even know me, please enlighten me Spitta

And the MRP and tribunal ? the same one that let Barry Hall off because of all the (media ) pressure?

Good well thought out and researched post indicative of advanced maturity

Actually there have been several well written replies to your OP on pages 3 and 4.

Instead you reply to the insulting ones and get on your high horse. Seems your also more interested in playing the man.

 

[Pie eyed]

This is proof that media hysteria influences the (independent) tribunal

I'm a jujitsu instructor of 20 odd years experience and that was not a chicken wing arm lock
The chicken wing arm lock has a bent elbow and can not be executed from a standing position by holding on to the wrist FFS (other wise the opponent would simply roll or stand up

So if that technique doesn't exist how can Judd be accused of doing it deliberately?

Judd was simply trying to pull him off the ball and if the roo player was on his back instead of his stomach everyone could see it for what it was

If anything the other roo players trying to pull Judd off of him whilst he was still holding the arm would have been what would have caused any damage

Also Did this roo player have any prexisting injury in that same region?

Nope no intent at all to do damage and unfairly beaten up by the media

No great fan of Carlton or Judd but Carlton shoulsd have taken on the tribunal with science

So your argument is that as the media term for a specific act which in fact did cause intentional injury to a player did not accurately describe your interpretation of another act designed to intentionally injure an opponent, then Judd should have got off and Carlton were hard done by?
Is it important at all that he, Judd, intentionally injured and already restrained player?

Your explanation of what Judd was "actuallyy doing is simply fiction.

You should be a war crimes lawyer for the defence.

No player in any code can ever be rightfully convicted of a "chicken-wing tackle" as humans do not have wings and are not chickens...

 

[Ron The Bear]

Here is an article i wrote on why the AFL seems to want to punish him harder than what is necessary

http://www.penandpapersports.com/document.php?docID=1012

Agree with the gist of that. Also applies to umpires giving certain players more leeway. Even the stars are not all treated evenly in the AFL.

 

[Spitta09]

Why exactly?
care to state your reasons for this statement?

Or just another sniper who wont stay on topic ( go to the bay mate)

Come on state your reasons why "the guy is an embarrassment ?"

Now that you'r playing the man rather than the topic, and don't even know me, please enlighten me Spitta

And the MRP and tribunal ? the same one that let Barry Hall off because of all the (media ) pressure?

Good well thought out and researched post indicative of advanced maturity

You say that Judd was "trying to pull him off the ball". Please spare me.. if you are trying to lift someone off the ball you don't grab a stranglehold of and twist someone's arm the way he did.

 

[BLue_Bloys]

This, Judd did fight it and lost then after being found guilty changed his plea to not guilty to somehow get a lenient suspension!

Well not really, he was pleading guilty to 'reckless' not 'intentional' - There's a massive difference between the two, I find it very hard to believe Judd's intention was to injure Adams. Personally I think the penalty is irrelevant 3, 5, 6 weeks whatever I'm not really phased, it's the assessed intent that will hurt his reputation much more.

Also something that has been glossed over is the fact that the AFL only notified Carlton something like 2-3 hours prior to the hearing what he was actually being charged with, I don't understand how something that farcical receives little to no attention in the media.

 

[jonbe54]

Loving the endless excuses and squirming, born to rule bites the dust

 

[The Old Dark Navy's]

I honestly think that all of the Carlton posts in these threads since Friday night must be taking the piss aren't they? Surely their supporters couldn't all be that stupid could they?

No more stupid than those levelling the accusation.

 

[The Old Dark Navy's]

Loving the endless excuses and squirming, born to rule bites the dust

Of course you are. I would never mistake you for being mature, objective or constructive.

 

[jonbe54]

Of course you are. I would never mistake you for being mature, objective or constructive.

And you really believe the reaction from blues fans are????

MMMM well happy navel gazing then. . .

 

[The Old Dark Navy's]

To be honest Carlton fans bring it on themselves. They seem to reveal in the hatred (and encourage it) except when it has an actual effect then it's too harsh.

Carlton have always had a 'born to rule mentality' and the transition to a national league has probably hurt them more then any other club.

It's not 1980 any more Carlton aren't this special snowflake who can just buy or bluster their way out of trouble.

The club has still not learnt humility.

To be honest, you would not have a single clue as to the humility of most Carlton supporters. You form your opinions based on isolated posts on BigFooty or perhaps the odd loudmouth at a game. You think that if somebody dares to disagree with a negative assessment of their team that you happen to hold (and therefore consider to be right) that they lack humility.

Most of the revelling in hatred comes when we are under siege and do not get fair opportunity to discuss against the tide. In the end, what choice do you have but to say ' **** 'em ' and fight back by embracing the hate. We are not the only supporters to do this. Most of us see this everyday on the boards but as an Eagles supporter, you need not take any notice of most of it unless it suits.

Perhaps I should be looking for the worst elements amongst Eagles supporters and tarring you with the same brush. Pure ignorance.

 

[Pedro59]

You say that Judd was "trying to pull him off the ball". Please spare me.. if you are trying to lift someone off the ball you don't grab a stranglehold of and twist someone's arm the way he did.

That's better Spitta now we are at least on subject

Yes, I believe in the heat of the moment judd grabbed an arm to pull him off or push him away or similar with no intention to hurt him
See, to me, time factors are important here and in this case it is measured in mili seconds
we have all seen the footage a hundred times (today alone even) and I see that judd certainly grabbed the arm and lifted a quarter of the total degrees that the arm was rotated BUT when Judd was then grabbed by the roos teamates and pulled down /away the next damaging three quarters of the rotation was made and maybe the damaging three quarters of rotation.
Hey maybe Judd could have let go of the arm when he was being pulled off /down (though we tend to cling to somethiing when we lose our balance)
Everything that Judd done would have been a non issue if executed exactly the same if the roo player was on his back instead of his front.(including with someone on top of the player).heck it would have even been a "stranglehold" ( I presume that you really mean just grabbing with two hands) and a "twist" but no damage

I do accept (as many other posters on here have stated ) that if an injury occurred regardless of intent or not a price has to be paid but I don't believe that it is a bad character type thing that other OPS and the media
is trying to sensationalise